To welcome Althouse to the list of 12 NYT subscribers, here is a free editorial.

I have to admit that until fairly recently I believed that modern liberals had no principles. I’ve reconsidered after listening to an excellent taped speech by Evan Sayet from 2007. Watch it and draw your own conclusions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c.

Modern liberals do have principles; it’s just that sane adults will have trouble recognizing them. Borrowed and embellished, these principles are:

1. Rational thought is evil. Rational thinkers will examine facts and consider different viewpoints. This inevitably leads to conflict with the left’s approved version of “reality”, a shared indefensible delusion which exists independent of facts.2. Indiscriminateness is a moral imperative. This underlies moral relativity and the notion that no person, or nation, or act is better than any other. In fact, the very idea of “better” or “right” is anathema. And wars fought to preserve conservative principles? Evil by definition.3. All behaviors should lead to identical outcomes. One must not be allowed to “excel”. Think self-esteem theory and the attempt by radical feminists to push legislation which would dictate equal wages across widely disparate occupations. Think socialism.4. Success is evidence of victimization. One can only rise above mediocrity by victimizing others, so wealth and success are proof positive of evil behavior by successful businesses and individuals – especially "old white males".And finally5. The end justifies the means. For the left there are no rules, moral and ethical behavior are antiquated and useless concepts, and any act or statement which promotes the cause is acceptable. This plays out constantly, varying only by degree from, for example, the MSM (grossly biased and distorted “news” coverage) to yesterday’s bomb-throwers (Ayers and Dorn) to today’s bomb-wearing extremists and leftist dictators – all of whom are lauded rather than condemned.

These principles are the foundation of the Democratic Party and the core beliefs of Barack Obama. They are why liberal policies fail and liberal beliefs cannot stand open, honest debate. These principles underlay/-lie the regimes of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro and Chavez - all of whom are heroes of the modern liberal in spite of the gulags and mass executions and suppression of free thought and expression. How can any rational, thinking citizen of the United States of America support such beliefs and their destructive consequences even if they are hidden behind clever political rhetoric? Answer: They can’t.

So you really are getting a puppy then? They're really not that hard to house train, you know. I can usually do it in one day. My approach usually works right off -- I first drink a few beers then show them what's expected, and where to go.

I swear. Sometimes people around here are tone-deaf to anything more complex than a ditty when it comes to things that are more liturgical than literal. (Or understanding that there's more than one way to understand something, and more than one way for that to be useful.)

If signing up for home delivery of the NYT helps Ann keep her vow of cruel neutrality during this election then I think we should start a petition to nominate Ann to the Supreme Court of these United States of America whatever the party that is ultimately chosen.

When I see someone reading a physical newspaper, I'm starting to have the same reaction as I do when I see people carrying a CD player Walkman: Oh! How... quaint. I remember when I used to carry one of those back in 1999. Then I sort of feel sorry for them, because I assume they're poor or something.

You'd really feel sorry for me, then, Palladian. I'm quite deliberately and seriously (seriously!) considering bringing back into use an old touch-tone phone (from the attic) on at least one, if not two, of our land-lines. I'm sick of the touchy electronic ones (and the number of times they've had to be replaced for weather or other elemental reasons). This is not the only example of our stepping back(ward), not by a longshot, even as/if we steadily focus future-ward for the most part. No, not all.

I wouldn't waste time feeling sorry for, vaguely or otherwise. There might be a reason or two having nothing to do with poverty, and sometimes quite the opposite--or, at least, only in search of riches of an entirely different type.

reader_iam, I have one of those twisty-corded ancient touchtone phones sitting right beside the monitor on the desk here.

I'm not a Luddite. In a power outage, a cordless phone is useless, but an old-fashioned one works just fine because the phones draw their power from the jack. If your electricity is at all unreliable, it's a good idea to have a corded phone.

We canceled our paper months ago, but we'll start it up again when my mom comes to stay this winter. She enjoys having the paper. We gave it up because the pleasure my husband got from reading the sports section was vastly outweighed by the irritation the rest of it caused.

I miss the comics the most -- the NYT doesn't even have comics! What's the point?!

I miss the comics the most -- the NYT doesn't even have comics! What's the point?!

I remember, as a little kid, jumping on my parent's bed on Sunday morning and waiting for my father to wake up. I would start to twirl his hair, he'd rouse angrily then laugh, kiss me good morning and take out the big Sunday paper.

Each country we were living in provided its own set of Sunday comics, but I remember Hagar, Family Circle, and Andy Capp, best.

He'd read those to me, and we'd laugh our hearts out.

I tell you, those little moments made everything that came afterwards so much easier between us.

Do you people (what do you mean you people) remember how to use the dial tones to call long distance for free?

You know, I think I have one of those auto tone-dialer thingies, and maybe even two, in the same box in the attic, if I'm recalling correctly, and also if I'm correctly the device and the (more than one) way it could be used. I remember when that device was a tad cutting edge, even, or so I thought ... .

EXAM QUESTION:Compare and contrast the following statements by public figures;

"I have taken a vow of cruel neutrality."

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman".

READING the TIMES is an exercise in gathering information, where the tone of the opinion pages and the news articles seem to be similar, if not identical.But READING is not the same as throwing cash at the Sulzberger trusts.SUBSCRIBING to the TIMES is similar to an American selling scrap steel to the Japs in 1940 - while it's not giving aid and comfort to the enemy, it's close.

P. Rich what a pathetic, nasty piece of work you are. Are you tumerous Bob Novak in disguise? I think that when your brain tumor is properly diagnosed that will explain your obnoxious rant. Have you run over any pedestrians lately? You are obviously a hit and run expert.

Wow - Trumpit is back - and the milk of human kindness still runs in his veins. Well written, Trumpy - look what you referenced in there - disease, hit and run, and you used "tumorous" and "tumor" in the same post. And "rant". Aren't you the big boy now! Your mommy must be very proud. Speaking of nasty, how is your mom? D'oh - now I've gone and slipped into your style of writing. A thousand pardons.

Now back to your little corner of the basement with you, read the labels carefully, and have a quiet time playing with yourself.

That is sooo not GREEN. Isn't there a better use for that tree? Think about the little critters that were displaced when it was cut down. And what about the energy to move it to the papermill, and the paper to the printer and eventually your door. By subscribing to the NY Times you are directly contributing to the an increase in greenhouse gases and furthering the destruction of the planet! Shameful! ;-)

Of course, you shouldn't ignore the higher risk of depression or in extreme cases suicide you will place yourself at reading such political nutball yap. And, if it is possible to suffer damage by uncontrollable laughter caused by absurdity you will suffer that too.

Save the planet and protect your sanity. Just say "No" to the New York Times. And the LA Times, Washington Post, and the other fantasy news organizations.

Trumpit said... ...Have you run over any pedestrians lately? You are obviously a hit and run expert.

You see there are two types of hit and run drivers the cowardly liberals and the true experts. The first, after drinking two much wine, will hit a pedestrian and keep on going; driving at a sensible speed so as not to attract attention.

The second, the true expert will hit the pedestrian. Then he will back up and go forward a few times to make sure hte pedestrian is dead. He will then put the petal to the metal and get the hell out of there. He will return home, pur a glass of fine brandy, put on some classical music, and enjoy the NYT.

There is something comforting about sitting in a comfortable chair and reading a newspaper. It also helps to have coffee nearby. I like being able to scan a paragraph and decide if a story warrants my attention -- that's harder to do with a click.

MadisonMan said... Reading newspapers is a slow activity. People need to slow down.

That would be nice if the papers had real reportage and interesting articles. Unfortunately, at least in my town, they are poorly written and the articles are dull. I can read the whole Sunday paper in about fifteen minutes; it takes longer to sort the mess out.

Just read in the online edition that they are cutting out a lot of sections of the paper to try to save money. They didn't mentions which parts. I could recommend some op-ed writers they could easily cut with no damage to the community. They could also send Frank Rich back to the theatre section where he could write about something he knows well.

1851 The New York Times. The New York daily newspaper with a reputation for accuracy is founded by Henry J. Raymond (1820-1869) as a conservative alternative to the sensational papers of the day. In 1896 it was purchased by Adolph Ochs, and it maintained its reputation as America's preeminent newspaper throughout the twentieth century.

My , my. You people would really have us all conform to one single way of thinking or consign us to re-education camps. I thought this was America, the land of free expression, religion, association, and speech.

I signed up for it mainly because it was only $39 a quarter. It's the deal they offer new students, but they give it to faculty too. So....

I like the visual overview of the big pages. It helps me see things in a different way. I have a very spacial memory, and I had been missing the feeling of seeing the news in the layout of 2 big pages.

Vic: FWIW, a three hour session is counterproductive. I suggest finding a new trainer. Plus, are you sure it's "flab?" An adult woman without some belly fat is both unattractive and unhealthy. I encourage you to resist current popular notions of feminine beauty.